John 3:16 points it out ....it doesn't say that Jesus volunteered...it states that God "GAVE" his only begotton Son ...hence no "Free Will"

Again, Jesus did it all on his own. No strings attached, no hand up his rear like a puppet. God may have sent Jesus for a purpose, BUT Jesus at any time could have just lived for himself and not did what our father wanted him to............ thus free will.

if Jesus did it all on his own then God didn't give him to the world....Jesus made that decision without any influence from God...therefore John 3:16 is a lie

In other words, you place your faith in people like Matthew, and not in Jesus.

My point was that Jesus himself never claimed to be the "Only Beggotten Son" of any personified God.

Evidently my point stands unchallenged.

Everything you've offered has been nothing more than third party hearsay, gossip, and rumors just as I had predicted.

Jesus never claimed to be the "Only Begotten Son" of any God.

All of Christianity is based on hearsay, rumors, and unreliable gossip that didn't even come from Jesus himself.



All you're suggesting here is that a person shouldn't question it, or think rationally. But that's absurd.

In fact, all your doing here is confessing that this is precisely what you do!

If you actually stop and think about some of this stuff, and question it against the wisdom of humanity as a whole you'd see how utterly absurd it is.

The very idea that an all-wise all-powerful God would need to solve any problem by having someone nailed to a pole is far beyond anything that I would even bother considering. Such a notion is clearly utterly stupid, IMHO.

It flies in the very face of the idea that such a God is either all-powerful or all-wise.

A God who has no choice but to have his only begotten son nailed to a pole would not be an all-powerful God.

A God who actually chooses to have his only begotten son nailed to a pole when other options exist would not be an all-wise God.

So the biblical story as a whole fails to live up to its own standards of a supposedly all-powerful all-wise God.

Not only that, but this story had already made God out to be a complete idiot in the Old Testament tales, long before Jesus ever came along. So the story was already without merit before we even get into the New Testament.

Reading this collection of stories with an open mind and an open heart causes me to put the stories down as complete fiction long before I even get through the Old Testament. No need to even read the absurdities in the New Testament.

Except on the cross when he screams "My father why hath thou forsaken me?!"

Jesus seems to believe god is his father that day and not a good father either.

But even then Jesus isn't saying anything more than any mortal man might say. After all, isn't God supposed to be the "Heavenly Father" of us all?

There's nothing in what Jesus supposedly said on the cross that implies that he was God's "Only begotten" son.

Moreover, that particular verse has been translated to death. Some bibles have him saying, "My God why hath thou forsaken me".

I always think of this as Jesus actually using God's name in vain. I think he might have actually been speaking to the crowd saying, "My God! Why hath thou forsaken me?"

He may have expected the people to have objected to having an innocent man crucified and protested against the crucifixion thus saving him. But they didn't. So he may not have been crying out to "God" at all but rather crying out to the mob.

Besides, since decades has passed since this event and the writings of the Gospels it's hard to say what Jesus might have said or not said when he was crucified. The entire New Testament is nothing but belated hearsay that is clearly tainted with rumors and an agenda to try to make out that God was the only begotten son of a God that he clearly didn't even agree with.

I was taught that is was Jesus weak moment before death when he couldn't stand the pain anymore and spoke to his dad for what his dad did to him at leaving him at the mercy of the evil humans.

In truth the bible is not reality to me at all so it is not relevant to me either way. I was just sharing.

IMHO the whole pain thing is absurd to begin with. Nowhere in the Bible does it even remotely suggest that sin is atoned via pain and/or suffering. So the idea that Jesus has to "suffer" to pay for the sins of man is an absurd idea to begin with.

Also, the human body goes into shock, or becomes numb before pain becomes that intolerable.

Finally, there are very many moral humans who have suffered through at least as much pain if not more, and also for much longer periods of time. Supposedly Jesus died the same day he was crucified. However, many people who suffer sever wounds or burns suffer for many days or weeks before dying, or potentially even recovering to be scared or maimed for the remainder of thier life. Which would be worse?

I saw a news special some time ago about a woman who lived in either Iraq or Afaganistan (can't remember which). She had supposedly cheated on her husband. When he discovered this he hung her by her feet. Cut both of her ears off, cut her nose off, and plucked out both of her eyeballs. Then left her hanging upside down to die. I think he might have also cut out her tongue, but I'm not sure of that.

In any case, I'm sure this woman suffered greatly.

Surprisingly she lived through the ordeal and was even in this video presentation. She continued to raise her kids after this mutaltion had taken place.

In all honesty, would I rather go through what this woman went through, or just simply be nailed to a pole? Well, neither sounds very nice, but I think I'd rather just get nailed to a pole that to have my face cut apart and my eyeballs plucked out of my head.

By the way, consider this. BOTH of these mutualitions were perforumed in the name of GOD and RElIGION!

Jesus was crucified in the NAME of the biblical God! That's right!

The Biblical God is the one who commanded people to murder heathens and blasphemists! This is why the crowd was able to request this punishment, because it was the directive of God to murder heathens.

The man who mutilated his wife for adultery was also given a green light by the same basic Abrahamic myths. By his religious views it was his 'duty' to mutulate his wife for having committed adultry.

So whether we look at what happened to Jesus, or what happened to this woman, the result is the same. It was a belief in religion that gave the GREEN LIGHT for this kind of behavior in the minds of the perpetrators in BOTH cases.

In fact, in the Biblical case this truly raise the ultimate question of the Biblical God's sanity.

In the Old Testament this God commands people to murder heathens, sinnners, and blasphemers. Yet this SAME GOD then supposedly sends his only begotten son into this same crowd to claim to be speaking for God and challenging the teachings of the Old Testament?

That would be a God who just shot himself in his own foot!

This is why the Bible makes no sense. Trying to read it with an open heart and an open mind is absurd. It neither makes any sense, nor is it a loving story. It's a story about a completely insane and inept God. This God is either suffering from Alzhiemers disease, or he's a demon! There's nothing SANE about these stories. They are totally insane and absurd.

By your own example of the Bible claiming to speak for God, if you quote my words, you're claiming to speak for me... What, you have a double standard? How utterly surprising.








What the hell are you trying to pull here??? Waaaaay too ambiguous untill you clarify your meaning, but I doubt you will.






No, they're not "false" or "wrong".
You claim the Bible says things it does not.
You say all Christians must believe the things that you claim the Bible "DEMANDS".
You say they are "delusional" if they don't agree with you.
You say or imply that people say or believe things that they do NOT.
You say that you provided proof of your claims when you did NOT.
You use words like "asinine, delusional, ridiculous, utterly absurd, utterly absurd, utterly absurd, bigoted, egotistical, la-la land, lame, stupid, prejudiced, paranoia, weak, air-head, fool, ludicrous...


And so you get an idea of how you post:

"Only an utterly insane, asinine, delusional, bigoted, air-headed fool would deny these truths."

That's because you're simply not following the BIG PICTURE.

You evidently aren't understanding what I'm saying. The things I say necessarily MUST BE TRUE in this mythology unless you want to deny the actual printed doctrine. There can be no doubt about it. Evidently you simply aren't following the case I'm presenting.

There can be no doubt that the Christian Bible demands that Jesus is the "Only Begotten Son of God".

I've already posted John 3:16 the most-used Christian verse ever. There can be no question that John demands that Jesus is the "Only Begotten Son of God". In other words, John is demanding that Jesus is special and not merely a pantheistic "Son of God" like all other mortal men.

Also, as an aside, I shouldn't even need that "proof" because everyone who knows anything about Christianity knows that one of its major tenets is that Jesus was born of a Virgin and he was not merely the mortal son of Joseph.

Although, I do believe that you have already attempted to sweep that one aside by claiming that the term "virgin" was merely a poor translation that really just meant "young maiden".

But doesn't that miss the whole point? If you're going to dismiss the Virgin Birth of Jesus, and renounce John's claim that he was the "Only Begotten Son" of God, then you're basically accepting that Jesus was nothing more than a mere moral man and the religion flops.

End of aside.


My point is that the religion necessarily holds that Jesus was the "Only Begotten Son" of God, and that this is paramount to the religion. And I hold that this must be accepted by any Christian as a major tenet of the religion. Why? Because to renounce this very idea is to renounce the most important claim of the New Testament. To renounce it reduces Jesus to a mere mortal man. Jesus had to have been intentionally sent by God for this religion to work, and Jesus necessarily must be a demigod for this religion to work. Take away that status and the whole religion of Christianity falls apart.

Now why is this so important you might ask.

Well, it's of paramount importance because of the very fact that Jesus was indeed crucified!

I surely hope that you won't argue with the fact that the biblical story does indeed have Jesus being crucified. If you deny that one, then there isn't much sense in even discussing the matter with you at all.

So now for the all-important question:

Who's idea was it to crucified Jesus? (assuming the above,… that Jesus was indeed the "Only Begotten Son of God" sent to Earth on some special mission for God.)

Well before we answer that question maybe we should ask a few another.questions first.

What was the mission of Jesus? (assuming that Jesus was indeed the "Only Begotten Son of God" sent to Earth on some special mission.)

Well, IMHO, there appears to be two possibilities and only two.

1. Jesus was sent to Earth to deliver a message (perhaps to describe a New Covenant between God and man as many Christians often suggest). However, in this scenario it was NOT God's intention for Jesus to be crucified.

(Or the second possibility:)

2. Jesus was sent to Earth to deliver a message AND to be brutally crucified as part of "God's Plan".


It is my position that neither of these two possibilities makes any sense at all. Why the first one makes no sense should be obvious. If God's only intent was to send a messenger to Earth to deliver a message and his messenger was inadvertently crucified against God's WILL, that just opens up a whole can of worms.

1. How could an all-powerful God, that even humans pray to for help, not be able to protect his "Only Begotten Son"? That makes absolutely no sense at all. If God can't even protect his "Only Begotten Son" from harm, then he's surely not going to be able to protect you or me! So the idea that the crucifixion was NOT God's idea or plan cannot be made to work.

Therefore we're stuck with #2 being the only possible option (assuming that Jesus is indeed "God's Only Begotten Son"). This is all based on this initial premise, because if Jesus was just a mortal man like Buddha then none of any of this is relevant.

So what do we do with #2?

The Christians have no choice but to recognize that the crucifixion had to have been God's plan (because nothing else makes sense), so now we need to have a reason why an all-wise, all-loving God would do such a horrific thing.

Another aside:

You seem to be upset because I keep claiming what Christians must believe, however, I feel that up to this point everything I've stated above must be believed by anyone who calls themselves a "Christian". To reject anything up to this point you're basically rejecting some major fundamental tenets of Christianity. You really have no choice be to stay with me up to this point at least. To reject anything I've claimed thus far is going to result in major problems with the religion.

I've been studying this religion my entire life, and contrary to what you might think I've tried everything I could possibly think of to save it. Why I bothered trying to save it is beyond me. In hindsight, it's not even a picture of God that I would truly even be interested in saving to be quite honest about. This religion has me at odds with God, claims that I'm a hopeless sinner who's only salvation can be had by accepting that God had his "Only Begotten Son" nailed to a pole to pay for my willful and deliberate rejection of God. None of that is true anyway. In my heart of hears I know that I have never rejected my creator, all I've ever done is search for genuine TRUTH, and I have not found it in the Bible, on the contrary all I find in the Bible is utter absurdities and genuinely horrible things!

However, the point is that if anyone is going to 'salvage' this religion, they MUST at least have accepted everything I've stated thus far, because this is what the doctrine demands. Let there be no doubt about that. Reject what I've said thus far and you're rejecting the religion.

The religion demands that Jesus is the "Only Begotten Son of God", and it demands that Jesus was crucified.

So up to this point you're either in agreement with me, or you're rejecting Christianity altogether, IMHO.

So that brings us to the final question:

Why would an all-wise all-powerfulGod "sacrifice" his only begotten son if he didn't need to?

We're already getting into a gray area of a "needy God". A God who's backed into some sort of corner with no "better" options available. Surely no sane person would believe that having someone crucified by nailing them to a pole is a "good" option. So we've got a clearly desperate God here. A God allowing some horrible act to be committed for some "good" reason?

Well, that's what the Christians claim. The crucifixion was for the ultimate salvation of souls. What could be a more "worthy cause"?

But how would this work? WHO was this sacrifice being made to?

That's my question, and a question that the Christians can never answer without getting into what I consider to be utter absurdities. In fact, if I could be convinced of why this makes sense, maybe I'd buy into the religion myself, but thus far in my entire life I have never heard anything that even remotely makes any sense at all.

In this mythology there are only three basic entities that sacrifices could be made to. God, Satan, and Mankind.

Does it make sense that God would need to make a sacrifice to appease mankind? Of course not. That's so utterly absurd no one would even remotely suggest such a thing. Mankind is suppose to be the helpless sinners in need of salvation, God most certainly has no need to appease men by making a sacrifice unto man.

Next possibility is Satan. Could Satan be so powerful that he is actually a threat to God to the point where God is so desperately losing that he has no choice but to sacrifice his "Only Begotten Son" to appease Satan? Well, there are a few people who buy into that scenario, personally I don't but. It gives Satan far too much power and would ultimately reveal a God who is weak and must appease a demonic angel.

Well, there's only one entity left!

God must be appeasing himself with this bloody morbid sacrifice! In fact, this is the most popular Christian notion, although they would never put it in these terms. They claim that God made a covenant with man in the Old Testament and God must honor that covenant and that covenant demands that someone must die to pay for sins, blah, blah, blah, and Jesus was the "Sacrificial Lamb" that served this purpose. This is why he had to be completely without sin, and born of a sinless virgin, blah, blah, blah.

This actually fits in with the idea of the blood sacrifices that were spoken of in the Old Testament, etc., and thus it makes the most sense in this overall mythology.

I personally don't buy into this explanation at all. Not one iota. However, I would take the stance that if a person is indeed a "Christian" they really have no choice but to buy into it. This is again where you get upset because I'm "demanding what Christians must believe". But it's true. They need to have some explanation for why it was necessary for God to have his "Only Begotten Son" sacrificed via a horrible crucifixion to make possible their salvation. This is the very foundational basis of the religion!

Take this need for salvation through Christ away and the religion is no longer "Christianity".

So when it comes to Christianity, as far as I'm concerned, there are no questions about whether or not Jesus is the "Only Begotten Son of God" (that's a given for this mythology).

There is no question of whether it was God's plan to have Jesus sacrificed via the crucifixion. (Again, that's a given for this mythology)

The only real question that's truly in dispute is why a supposedly all-wise all-powerful God would have gotten himself into such a desperate position as to have no other choice but to have his Only Begotten Son crucified to make salvation available to a bunch of moronic mortals who can not even keep from sinning of their own FREE WILL.



Yes, that's precisely how I feel about this mythology. You've got a supposedly all-wise all-powerful God who has gotten himself backed into a corner where his only option to save the objects of his own creation is to have only begotten son morbidly crucified and nailed to a pole?

YES! IMHO, that's is so utterly insane and absurd, that I can't say it enough! It's an utterly insane an absurd mythology! Period.

That's my honest sincere view of this ancient Hebrew mythology, and I'm sorry if any modern humans today are offended by my views on this, but this is indeed my view on this ancient mythology.

One Last Aside:

I also have a myriad of reasons why I feel this entire mythology is insane and cannot be the word of any genuine personified Godhead. I reject it on the Old Testament alone, the Jesus story is just absurdity upon absurdities.

I highly question the "wisdom" of a God who asks people to atone their sins by sacrificing animals in the first place. That was just a hangover from Greek Mythology and other Mediterranean mythologies. Take Zeus, give him a jealous streak, make him into a male-chauvinistic pig, and you've got the Biblical God. It's an obvious extension of the same kind of thinking. It's not even original theme.

A god who asks people to judge others and stone sinners to death?

(I personally think that should be God's job, not his followers.) What's wrong with God doing his own judging and punishing? To me, the very fact that the authors of the Bible asked their readers to judge others and stone sinners to death tells me that the authors knew there isn't any personified God to do this and thus they were trying to get their readers to do it!

Why would a capable God ask mere pathetic mortals to judge each other and stone sinners to death?

That's a red flag right here!

I question a lot of the so-called "wisdom" of the Old Testament.

A God who condones slavery and even offers instructions on how to keep slaves?

A God who condones male-chauvinism?

A jealous God who condones the murdering of heathens?

To me that makes no sense. Why instruct people to murder heathens? Why not instruct them on how to communicate and educate them peacefully instead?

Ask yourself two simple questions when you read the Bible:


1. Would an all-wise all-powerful God instruct people to do these things written in the Old Testament?

OR

2. Would mortal men who are attempting to get their readers to do their dirty work in the name of a God write this kind of stuff?


When I ask these two question, questions #2 always makes far more sense!

This book was written by men with the intent to control the masses, it wasn't written by any all-wise all-powerful God.

End of Aside


So yes, I think there is more than sufficient reason to recognize that the Hebrew folklore and mythology was really nothing more than a society that tried to use a "Zeus-like Godhead" to control the masses. They just made him jealous (to protect THEIR doctrine), and they made him male-chauvinistic because that's what these men preferred in their society. The Old Testament is almost like the Taliban! Keep the woman submissive and socially SILENT! In fact, I imagine the Taliban themselves probably got their male-chauvinistic ideas from this very same religious folklore.

Christianity has ROOTS baby! But only because Christianity itself is just another spin-off of the same ancient folklore and mythologies.

A lot of Christians love Jesus because they like what He taught (not what the Old Testament taught). And even Jesus didn't agree with what was taught in the Old Testament. The teachings of Jesus are far more in line with the teachings of Buddhism than with anything taught in the Old Testament.

So why do we keep using Jesus to support the Taliban-like bigotry and ignorance of the Old Testament?

Let's recognize that Jesus actually spoke out against that crap and was instead teaching the far more highly moral values of Buddhism. The moral values that everyone actually LIKES!

According to what The Bible says, probably not.
We should be able to see these...

But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Hebrews 12:22-24




We should also be able to see this...

Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.
Numbers 22:31




And these...

And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
2 Kings 6:17



In spite of the fact every Sunday, people sing... I once was lost, but now I'm found, was blind, but now I see... Jesus warned the church in the last days that we are blind....

Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Rev.3:7-8


There are many things we should be able to do, and see; but we are a faithless generation.

And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.
Mark 14:36

Jesus was making reference to Psalm when he said that; the Pharisees were fulfilling verses 7, and 8; it also prophesied of his hands, and feet being pierced in verse 16.

It also points out something is wrong that we are often taught in churches... we are often told that, God cannot look on sin, and he turned his face from Jesus, that's why Jesus is said to have called out, My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me.
Verse 24 disagrees with that common church teaching.

Other notable verses in the Psalm Jesus was quoting on the cross are... V:17, V:18, V:27 and 31.




1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?

2 O my God, I cry in the day time, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent.

3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.

4 Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.

5 They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.

6 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.

7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,

8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts.

10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.

11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help.

12 Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.

13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.

14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.

15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.

18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

19 But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me.

20 Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.

21 Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.

23 Ye that fear the LORD, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.

24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

25 My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that fear him.

26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the LORD that seek him: your heart shall live for ever.

27 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

28 For the kingdom is the LORD's: and he is the governor among the nations.

29 All they that be fat upon earth shall eat and worship: all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul.

30 A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.

31 They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this.

Psalm 22:1-31

Here we have Jesus openly confessing that he doesn't want to do this thing, yet he is willing only if it is the will of the Father.

But that flies in the face of previous statements that Jesus and the Father are One.

This implies that Jesus himself did not even understand the significance or need for his own crucifixion.

OR, it implies that the whole story is totally fraudulent and Jesus never even said this prayer in the first place. This is what I personally believe.

After all, what did these authors do? Follow Jesus around in his private moments listening in on his prayers to God?

Jesus himself chastised the Pharisees for praying in public, and taught that we should pray in private. Surely he would not then go against his own teachings praying in public.

So I highly question where Luke could have possibly gotten this information other than making it up himself.

There are many things in the gospels I highly question. Matthew writes of a voice from heaven that spoke out to a crowd saying "This is my beloved son in whom I'm well pleased". Yet we find absolutely no historical record of this event outside of these gospels.

Sounds made-up to me! If something of this magnitude would have truly happened there should have been many rumors about the event recorded in normal historical channels, but there isn't. Thus implying to me that this is yet another totally fabricated tale by the authors of the gospels.

Job 1:21
Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.

I would ask him ....if you are so forgiving ...then why didn't you forgive Adam nad Eve

It's not saying that in anyway. God gave Jesus to the world in a sense God could have stopped the crucifixion from happening.

MANY Posts to this topic so I have only skimmed the last 5 or 6 pages.

One thing that remains consistent whenever Biblical scripture is involved is that individual interpretation is endless. That is a fact; it must be regarded as fact because the empirical evidence exists in the splintered offspring of the Christian faith. By some accounts, these sects range from some 12 to over 30 Thousand.

All of these sects exist because of different interpretation.

Therefore, continuing to debate based on individual interpretation of a single set of documents bound in one book called the Bible is a rather futile endeavor.

At least a few have recognized that fact and have taken steps toward a solution.

What was their solution?

LOOK BEYOND THE ONE BOOK.

If you can read that one book, you can read other information. But not to worry, for all those who find their truth in the pages of that one book, why not make comparisons of that part of the book which was ‘supposedly’ faithfully transcribed from the Torah directly with the Torah?

That’s right, why not do some research into the ‘original’ Old Testament by returning to its origin, the Torah?

One warning though, it should be obvious that the Jewish religion, over 1,000 years older than Christianity, is not open to a wide array of interpretation, as evidenced by the very few sects which have spawned from its base in all that time.

So the logical question of any believer should be:
Why has the Torah, and the Jewish religion on which it is based, remained relatively pure after over 3,000 years while Christianity, which ‘supposedly’ began with the same original text, has splintered into 10’s of thousands in under 2,000 years?

Wouldn’t it be logical to reference the original Torah (as it was meant to be read) to see how or why the Christian religion has become a tumultuous, contentious, bunch of inconsistent beliefs that it is today?

IF the Christian religion is in fact a continuation of Torah offerings, then shouldn’t there be total consistency between the Torah ( used in place of the biblical ‘old testament’) and the new testament?

But no such consistency exists, not even the personality, or attributes of God are consistent between the Torah and the Bible.

The God of the Torah would NOT just decide to invalidate His own interactive history with man from the time of Adam & Eve up to the time of Jesus. Yet Christians are taught to believe that’s exactly what God did, and so they seek no knowledge of God or prophecy prior to the New Testament. Remember if you think the Bible’s Old Testament is a faithful rendition of the Torah, you have been miserably misled.

In fact, it is difficult to consider that the Christian God of plurality could even be the same God as portrayed in the Torah.

Or better yet - IF you ever stand in front of your God, ask Him which God he is - the God of the Christians or the God of the Torah?

God changed NOTHING, made NOTHING meaningless, canceled NOTHING. God and everything God has made works in phases.
Day is fulfilled and turns to Night
Birth is fulfilled and turns to death on this earth

An so on. God gave the old testament *first phase* Then God fullfilled what he told us in the old testament and gave us the new testament *second phase*.